Bernardini and Western Australian Planning Commission

The applicants, Bernardini, sought approval for a subdivision of their property into six rural residential lots, which would vary from the adopted Development Plan. The Western Australian Planning Commission refused the application, citing concerns over the impact on remnant vegetation, building envelopes, and the site's role as a wildlife and biodiversity corridor. The applicants appealed to the Land and Environment Court, which found in their favour. The Commission appealed to the Supreme Court, which upheld the original decision.

The court was required to determine whether the proposed subdivision complied with the objectives of the Rural Residential zone and the relevant Development Plan. The court examined the effect of the draft local biodiversity strategy on the application and whether the proposed subdivision was 'generally' in accordance with the Development Plan. The court also considered the impact on the site's role as a wildlife and biodiversity corridor and the potential effect of conservation covenants as a condition of subdivision.

The court found that the proposed subdivision did not align with the objectives of the Rural Residential zone and the relevant Development Plan. The court noted that the site's role as a wildlife and biodiversity corridor was significant and that the proposed subdivision would have a detrimental effect on this aspect. The court also found that the proposed subdivision did not comply with the draft local biodiversity strategy, which aimed to protect and enhance biodiversity. The court held that the proposed subdivision was not 'generally' in accordance with the Development Plan, and that conservation covenants would not mitigate the negative impact on the site's role as a wildlife and biodiversity corridor.

The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Land and Environment Court. The court ordered that the applicants pay the costs of the appeal.